New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added sections to address missing gaps #631

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@pallan51
Copy link

pallan51 commented Jan 7, 2019

Inspired by the New Physiocratic League platform

@openpolitics-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

openpolitics-bot commented Jan 7, 2019

This proposal is open for discussion and voting. If you are a contributor to this repository (and not the proposer), you may vote on whether or not it is accepted.

How to vote

Vote by entering one of the following symbols in a comment on this pull request. Only your last vote will be counted, and you may change your vote at any time until the change is accepted or closed.

vote symbol type this points
Yes :white_check_mark: 1
No :negative_squared_cross_mark: -1
Abstain 🤐 :zipper_mouth_face: 0
Block 🚫 :no_entry_sign: -1000

Proposals will be accepted and merged once they have a total of 2 points when all votes are counted. Votes will be open for a minimum of 7 days, but will be closed if the proposal is not accepted after 90.

Votes are counted automatically here, and results are set in the merge status checks below.

Changes

@pallan51, if you want to make further changes to this proposal, you can do so by clicking on the pencil icons here. If a change is made to the proposal, no votes cast before that change will be counted, and votes must be recast.

@Floppy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

Floppy commented Jan 10, 2019

Thanks @pallan51! There is some interesting stuff in here. I'll have a proper read and vote soon!

@Floppy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

Floppy commented Jan 10, 2019

Having had a brief read through, there are certainly some things in here that I would vote in, though I'm less sure about others. @pallan51 would you be up for submitting some of the ideas separately? The anti-corruption and licensing paragraphs are certainly the sort of thing we could vote on separately to the big rewrite of the tax section. What do you think?

Vote: 🤐

@pallan51

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

pallan51 commented Jan 20, 2019

The idea was that as there is already a land value tax as part of this platform (as recommended by economists across the political spectrum), the manifesto is already halfway to being a Geoist style philosophy. The idea of shifting the tax burden away from labour and more on to landis the centerpiece of that. The LVT currently part of the platform allows relief to come to labour in the form of tax reductions, or as far as a negative rate of income taxation that the New Physiocratic League advocates for. The idea can be summed up as follows:

• Negative net taxation on personal incomes/savings (see the New Physiocratic League's Three Pillars proposal)
• Negative net taxation on productive business (see Sectoral Banks)
• Tax products of nature and land value, not taxes on productive property (see the New Physiocratic League's ULT proposal)
• Progressive consumption taxes, not taxes on production (see Ben Cardin’s PCT proposal)
• Replace bureaucracy with automatic mechanisms (see New Physiocratic League's Automatic Mechanisms proposal)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment